DI CP22 F7 Ocrcombined Withcitations Updated.Pdf

TO: INITIAL DATE

prepare reply comment & advice______see me______approval______as requested investigate______as promised note & return P. C.______first name______file reply for signature of REMARKS:

FROM: DATE: March 10, 1969

AGENDA: Maryland Campaign Planning Meeting

I. Opening remarks by Chairman Harris

II. Assessment by Senator Tydings of 1970 Election prospects

III. Discussion of projects and programs that need to be undertaken now for 1970 race

IV. Steps that need to be taken to provide for the most effective and coordinated campaign in Maryland -- involvement of the party, Governor, Congressional campaigns March 10, 1969

Invited to Maryland Campaign Planning Meeting:

Sen. Joseph Tydings

Ken Gray AA to Senator Tydings

Sen. Daniel Inouye, Chairman Senate Democratic Campaign Committee

Nordy Hoffman Senate Democratic Campaign Committee

Cong. Ed Edmondson House Campaign Committee

Ken Harding House Campaign Committee

Al Barkan & Mary Zon COPE

William Dodds UAW

Frank McGrath COPE Area Director

Charles Della, Pres. State AFL-CIO

Culver Windsor COPE Director

Andy Lewis

J. C. Turner, Pres. DC-Md. Central Labor Union

Martin Bond DC-Md. Central Labor Union COPE -2-

Nick Fornaro, Pres. Baltimore Central Labor Union

Thomas Moran

James O'Brien United Steel Workers

Evelyn Dubrow Garment Workers

Bill DuChessi Textile Workers

Democratic National Committee:

Geri Joseph Bill Welsh Vick French • George Bristol Al Spivak WASHINGTON, WYOMING, McGEE, SOUTH DAKOTA, MISSOURI, ICHORD, ILLINOIS, DAWSON, KENTUCKY, PERKINS, WEST VIRGINIA, PENNSYLVANIA, NEW YORK, CELLER, MAGNUSON, Senate Senate Post Office and McGOVERN, Senate House Internal Security House Committee on House Education and RANDOLPH, Senate Pub- MORGAN, House Foreign House Judiciary Commerce Committee, Civil Service Committee, Select Committee on Committee, Houston, Government Operations, Labor Committee, lic Works Committee, Affairs Committee, Committee, Brooklyn, Seattle, Wash.: 557,087 Laramie, Wyo.: 17,520 Nutrition and Human Mo.: 1,660 pop. Mo.: Chicago, III.: 3,550,404 Hindman, Ky.: Under Elkins, W.Va.: 8,307 Fredericktown, Pa.: N.Y.: 2,627,319 pop. pop. Wash.: 2,853,214 pop. Wyo.: 330,066 pop. Needs, Mitchell, S.O.: 4,319,813 pop. pop. III.: 10,081,158 2,500 pop. Ky.: pop. W.Va.: 1,860,421 Under 2,500 pop. N.Y.: 16,782,304 pop.; JACKSON, Senate 12,555 pop. S.D.: pop.; PRICE, House 3,038,156 pop. pop.; STAGGERS, House Pa.: 11,319,366 pop. pop.; DULSKI, House Interior and Insular 680,514 pop. Committee on Standards Interstate and Foreign Post Office and Civil Affairs Committee, V of Official Conduct, Commerce Committee, Service Committee, Everett, Wash.: East St. Louis, III.: Keyser, W.Va.: 7,041 Buffalo. N.Y.: 81,712 pop. 532,759 pop. 40,304 pop. States with Congressional ------Committee Chairmen, Red boxes are Senate chairmen, blue boxes are House chairmen, and states i cross-checks have NEVADA, BIBLE, Senate Select Small Business House and Senate chairmen Committee, Reno, Nev.: 51,470 pop., Nev.: ALASKA 285,278 pop. NEW JERSEY, WILLIAMS, Special Senate Committee on Aging, Westfield, CALIFORNIA, MILLER, N.J.: 31,447 pop. House Committee on N.J.: 6,066,782 pop. Science and Astronau- tics, Alameda, Calif.: 63,855 pop. Calif.: 15,717,204 pop.; HOLIFIELD, Joint Atomic Energy Committee, Montebello, Calif.: 40,613 pop.

MARYLAND, TYDINGS, Senate Committee on District of Columbia, Havre de COLORADO, ASPINALL, Grace, Md.: 8,510 pop. Md.: 3,100,689 House Committee on pop.; FRIEDEL, House Administration Interior and Insular Committee, Baltimore, Md.: 939,024 Affairs, Palisade, Colo.: pop.; GARMATZ, House Merchant Marine Under 2,500 pop. Colo.: and Fisheries Committee, Baltimore, 1,753,947 pop. Md.: 939,024 pop.; FALLON, House Public Works Committee, Baltimore, Md.: 939,024 pop.

NEW MEXICO, ANDERSON, Senate Aeronautical and Space The population figures shown are based on the Sciences Committee, Albuquerque, N.M.: 1960 census. The town or city listed below 201,189 pop. N.M.: each chairman's name is his hometown. When 951,023 pop. there is more than one chairman from a state, the state's population is listed only once— under the first chairman's name. TEXAS, YARBOROUGH, Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee, The map of the United States is distorted to reflect the Austin, Tex.: 186,545 size pop. Tex.: 9,579,677 of the states in terms of population based on the pop.; POAGE, House 1960 census. Agriculture Committee, ARKANSAS, FULBRIGHT, Waco, Tex.: 97,808 pop.; Senate Foreign Relations MISSISSIPPI, STENNIS, MAHON, House Appro- Committee, Fayette- Senate Armed Services priations Committee, ville, Ark.: 26,279 pop. Committee, De Kalb, SOUTH CAROLINA, Lubbock, Tex.: 128,691 Ark.: 1,786,272 pop.; Miss.: Under 2,500 pop. RIVERS, House Armed pop.; PATMAN, House McCLELLAN, Senate LOUISIANA, ELLENDER, Miss.: 2,178,141 pop.; Services Committee, Banking and Currency Government Operations Senate Committee on EASTLAND, Senate Judi- Charleston, S.C.: NORTH CAROLINA, Committee, Texarkana, Committee, Camden, Agriculture, Houma, La.: ciary Committee, Dodds- 75.940 pop. S.C.: TENNESSEE, EVINS, JORDAN, Senate Rules Tex.: 30,218 pop.; Ark.: 14,604 pop.; 4,665 pop. La.: ville, Miss.: Under 2,500 ALABAMA, SPARKMAN, GEORGIA, RUSSELL, 2,382.594 pop.; House Select Com- and Administration TEAGUE, House Com- MILLS, House Ways and 3,257,022 pop.; LONG, pop.; COLMER, House Senate Banking and Senate Appropriations McMILLAN. House Com- mittee on Small Committee, Saxa- mittee on Veterans’ Means Committee, Senate Finance Com- Rules Committee, Currency Committee, Committee, Winder, Ca.: mittee on the District Business, Smithville, pahaw, N.C.: Under Affairs, College Station, Kensett, Ark.: Under mittee, Shreveport, La.: Pascagoula, Miss.: Huntsville, Ala.: 123,519 5,555 pop. Ga.: of Columbia, Florence, Tenn.: 2,348 pop. 2,500 pop. N.C.: pop. Ala.: 3,266,740 pop- 3,943,116 pop. Tex.: 11,396 pop. 2,500 pop. 160,535 pop. 17,155 pop. S.C.; 24,722 pop. Tenn.: 3,567,089 pop. 4,556,155 pop. ANALYSIS OF KEY SENATORIAL CONTESTS

The. 1970 Senatorial elections provide the Democrats with the strongest challenge to their control of the Senate since 1954. A net gain of seven Senatorial seats would provide the Republicans with majority leadership of the Senate-

According to the Republican National Committee documents which we have seen, there are twelve Senatorial seats which the Republicans are aiming to capture- These seats are in the following states: Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, ' "North Dakota, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming- Using this information, I thought it would be significant to see how much things have changed over the last six years in these twelve states. Generally, we all know much that has happened since the 1964 elections in political terms, but in terms of population characteristics as well as specific voting behavior patterns, these twelve states present a formidable challenge for the Democrats to control.

In a majority of these twelve states, the suburban population has grown by at least 25 per cent and in some cases up to 50 per cent. For the first time in our nation’s history, more people live in the suburbs than in the central city. These voters who are generally homeowners dependent on an income shrunk by inflation, have a new set of values which differ from those that they had as the big-city dwellers. They are divorced from the center city political organizations and tend to have a more Independent-Republican orientation.

...... The median family income is now around $9,300. One third of the voters in these twelve states have personal disposable income in excess of $10,000. For this -2-

reason, these people will tend to look at liberal Democrats as spenders. If the incumbent Senators are unable to put the blame for inflation and taxes on the Republican Administration, they will find a skeptical electorate.,

In 1968, law and order was the second biggest issue., In 1970, law and order appears to remain a major issue confronting all candidates. With the exceptions of Wyoming, Tennessee, North Dakota, and Indiana, the total crime index in the remaining eight G. O. P. target states is high. This fact puts another obstacle in the way of the Democratic incumbents who are certain to be targets of Republican criticism.

According to the Gallup Poll, party affiliation in the past five years has become decidedly more Independent and less Democratic, Dem. Rep. Ind. 1964 53 25 22 ! 1969 42 28 30 In these twelve states there are large numbers of Democrats becoming Independents, The traditional appeals to vote Democratic will not be sufficient in 1970. -3-

Politically, the following things have happened in these twelve states over the last decade:

PRESIDENTIAL: Nation 12 GOP Target States Kennedy 1960 50. 1 52. 1 Johnson 1964 61.0 60.8 Humphrey 1968 42.7 39.9 Wallace 1968 13.5 15.5

In 1960, President Kennedy ran a far stronger race in these states than he did nationwide. Four years later, President Johnson carried all twelve states nearly matching his national popular vote of 61 per cent. In the 1968 Presidential election, Vice President Humphrey won only two of the twelve states, and received almost 3 per cent less than he did nationally. In the first eight years of the sixties, the Democratic Presidential standard-bearer has dropped a total of 5 per cent from his position relative to his national standing.

CONGRESSIONAL: Total Congressional Seats-12 GOP Target States Democrats Republicans

1964 76 29 1968 59 49 Net Change -17 +20

With the exception of Tennessee and Nevada, the remaining ten states have experienced a loss in Democratic Congressional representation. In 1964, the Democrats had five Congressmen for -4- every two Republicans in the target states; today the margin has shrunk to six Democrats to five Republicans. This is another indication of eroding Democratic strength in the key states.

STATE LEGISLATURES: Total 12 Target States Democrats Republicans 1964 1103 489 1968 785 816 Net Change -318 +327

In 1964, Democrats held a majority of the combined seats of the state legislature in every one of the twelve states except New Jersey and Ohio. In 1968, Democrats were in the minority in seven of the twelve legislatures. Nearly 70 per cent of the legislative seats in these twelve states were held by Democrats in 1964. As this election year begins, not even half of these seats are in Democratic hands. Thus, even at the local level, Democratic fortunes have waned since these twelve Democratic Senators were last elected.

VOTER TURNOUT:

12 GOP Target States

1964 64.2% 1966 50.6% Fall-Off -13.6% -5-

VOTER TURNOUT (continued): One of the hardships that these Senators will face in 1970 is the reduced turnout of an off-year election. When these Senators last ran in 1964 (a Presidential year), nearly two-thirds of the electorate in these twelve states voted. In 1966, an off-year, barely more than half showed up, a decline of 13.6 per cent. It is estimated that three-fourths of these voters are Democrats and, therefore, the smaller turnout works heavily against Democratic candidates. Each one of these Senators will have to wage strong campaigns to get these Democrats to the polls.

CONCLUSION: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has undertaken elaborate research efforts on these twelve key states, and were it not for the outstanding Senators up for re-election, our cause would be lost. Even with these fine men, we have a great deal to do if we are to remain as the majority party when we convene one year from now. If our best effort is to encourage our colleagues up for re- election in 1970, we might as well resign control of the Senate today* What is needed is for each of us pulling together through the Senatorial Campaign Committee to see that we are all here come January, 1970. As a team we can make it, but if it is each man to himself, our chances are slim. | Here are some suggestions on what we can do for one another: 1. If your staff has produced an unusually good issue paper, the Senate Campaign Committee will disseminate it to Senators up for re-election for their modification and use. 2. Jot down some of the better ideas from your last campaign, especially techniques which were effective in the suburbs, and let the Campaign Committee compile them in a booklet for everyone's use. 3. If your state's television extends into a colleague's state, arrange a joint press conference on a problem of areawide significance, publicizing the work the -6-

Senator has done.

4. If you or your wife has close ties with a ■particular organization or ethnic group, contact Nordy Hoffmann to arrange an endorsement appearance in a colleague's state. 5. If one of your staff people is particularly good on some facit of a campaign, loan his services thru the Campaign Committee to one of your colleagues for a month or so.

Each of these suggestions asks you to give up something of yourself, but if we are to remain the majority party in the 92nd Congress, it is indeed a small sacrifice. DANIEL K. INOUYE HAWAII CHAIRMAN, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Congressional Campaign Committee DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL DINNER COMMITTEE

MAYFLOWER HOTEL, WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 • Telephone ( 202 ) 737-8121

GEORGE M. STEINBRENNER, III April 18, 1969 CHAIRMAN

NEALE ROACH DIRECTOR

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye Senator, State of Hawaii Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Inouye:

It has been over a week since my last letter to you regarding the very important May 12th Dinner and I want to report to you that as of yesterday, while our money amount in for the Dinner is equal at this point to last year, we have sold only half as many tickets as we had at this point last year. At our Dinner Committee meeting yesterday in Washington, I was assured that during the last week everyone pitches in and not to worry too much. However, I am a worrier by nature and I thought I would pass along to you the grounds for my concern. I know we are all busy, but I also know that we all share the concern for the success of this Dinner and for the 1970 elections which are so very crucial. That is why I am writing to ask you to please do everything possible to assist us in con- tacting possible contributors to the Dinner so that we can make this a great success.

In the next few days you will be receiving from Nordy Hoffmann a complete list of all of the Co-Chairmen for the Dinner who have been selected from business and professional fields throughout the country. These men were all in Washington yesterday for a briefing and I can assure you that they are all intent on getting the job done for the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees through this Dinner.

Dinner, Monday, May 12, 1969 Washington Hilton Hotel, Washington, D. C. -2-

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye April 18, 1969 Senator, State of Hawaii

I would ask only that you have your administrative assistant get in touch with the Co-Chairman from your area and give him every possible coopera- tion you can in his efforts.

Thank you so very much for your attention.

Respectfully yours,

George M. Steinbrenner, III Chairman

GMS:rr TO: INITIAL

1. Senator Inouye via Eiler Ravnholt______

2. ______

3.______

4.______

FYI reply comment & advice see me approval as requested : investigate as promised note & return file X first name signature

REMARKS:

FROM: DATE: Barbara 4/25/69 TELEGRAM D R A F T

REQUEST YOUR PRESENCE AT URGENT MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 28, 1969, NORTH

ROOM MAYFLOWER HOTEL, 5:00 P.M. REGARDING DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL

DINNER. IF APRIL 28 IS NOT CONVENIENT, ANOTHER MEETING WILL BE HELD

APRIL 29. PLEASE ADVISE WHICH DATE IS BETTER FOR YOU BY TELEPHONING

THE DINNER COMMITTEE HEADQUARTERS, 737-8121.

MIKE MANSFIELD SENATE MAJORITY LEADER

JOHN W. McCORMACK SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE TO: INITIAL

1. Senator Inouye via Eiler Ravnholt

3. 4.

x i FYI reply comment & advice see me approval as requested ■ investigate as promised note & return file first name signature

REMARKS:

FROM: DATE: Barbara 4/29/69 DANIEL K. INOUYE MICHAEL J. KIRWAN, M.C. HAWAII OHIO CHAIRMAN, Democratic CHAIRMAN, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Congressional Campaign Committee DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL DINNER COMMITTEE Mayflower hotel, Washington, d. c. 20036 • Telephone (202) 737-8121

GEORGE M. STEINBRENNER, III CHAIRMAN

NEALE ROACH DIRECTOR

PRESS RELEASE FOR WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1969, IN THE A.M.

The Democratic Congressional Dinner Committee tonight announced the decision

to re-schedule its Sixth Annual Dinner to June 26th. The affair will be held at

the Washington Hilton in Washington, D. C. The re-scheduling was requested by

the fourteen recently appointed regional Co-Chairmen.

Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii is Chairman of the Senate wing of the

Committee. Representative Michael J. Kirwan of Ohio heads the House side and

George M. Steinbrenner, III of Cleveland, Ohio, is Chairman of the Dinner

Committee. Bliss Sees a GOP Senate Associated Press The former National Re- and 43 Republicans in the publican Committee chairman, Senate. As for the House of Repre- Ray C. Bliss predicted yester- sentatives Bliss, 61, would day that Republicans will cap- make no predictions. He said ture control of the Senate he was very disappointed in next year. the slight change in the House “This, of course, depends on during the last election. Re- publicans picked up only four the impact and performance seats. There are now 243 Dem- of the President,” he added. ocrats and 190 Republicans in There are now 57 Democrats the House. April 24, 1969

Invited to the April 24th Wyoming Campaign Planning Meeting

Sen. Gale McGee

Dick Cook < Sen. McGee’s Staff

Sen. Daniel Inouye

Sen. Gaylord Nelson

Nordy Hoffmann Senate Campaign Committee

Ken Harding Ted Henshaw House Campaign Committee

Kermit Overby Dick Dell NRECA

Reuben Johnson National Farmers Union

Al Barkan Mary Zon National COPE

Mark Nicksic Pres. i AFL-CIO

John Holaday Exec. Sec. Wyoming AFL-CIO

Jack McCoy COPE Area Director - 2 -

Tony Mazzochl OCAW

Al Chesser Railroad Brotherhood

James O’Brien USW

Dave Anderson CWA

Mel Boyle Stanley Thompson (Wyoming) IBEW

DNC

Sen. Fred Harris Bill Welsh Mark Shields George Bristol Nick Kostopulos Al Spivak Harriet Cipriani GERALD RAFSHOON ADVERTISING, inc. The First National Bank Building/two peachtree street, n.w. atlanta, georgia 30303/ area code 404 / 523-6211

The Honorable Edmund S. Muskie Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Room 130 Senate Office Building Washington 25, D.C., 20510

Dear Senator Muskie:

Senator Herman E. Talmadge, whom we represented in the recent election, has passed on your letter of December 18th to us for action. Your letter requested information and evaluation of his advertising effort in the 1968 election.

First, let me discuss in general terms the effort made and the use of advertising.

1. We conducted an advertising campaign for Senator Talmadge in the Democratic Primary, held September 11th. His opposition in the primary was Maynard Jackson, an Atlanta attorney. We considered the opposition rather minor in the primary and the use of advertising was to remind voters of the upcoming primary and to present the Senator and his record, seniority, and service to the state. Television was the main medium used with radio and newspaper secondary media. We produced two sets of TV spots — each consisting of a 60-sec., 20-sec., and 10-sec. spot. In addition we produced one five-minute program which consisted entirely of film footage with voice-over narration.

2. In view of limited funds and limited opposition, we advertised only during the two week period preceding the primary. We were on ten television stations, blanketing every market in the state; 106 radio stations with a token 10 spots each on the day before the primary; and we ran one newspaper ad in all week- lies and dailies statewide.

3. Our television campaign, which was the main effort, was scheduled in all time periods, The 5-minute program was used in prime time and in late night and early morning shows.

4. We were very fortunate in that Senator Talmadge allowed us to produce the very best kind of material possible. Too often, candidates do not understand the need for high quality production (and the costs GERALD RAFSHOON ADVERTISING, inc. The First National Bank Building/two peachtree street, n.w. atlanta, georgia 30303/ area code 404 / 523-6211

Senator Edmund S. Muskie January 7, 1969 Page 2

that go along with quality) and prefer to cut corners in this respect. The result often is that of having a mediocre commercial or film being used over and over. Senator Talmadge preferred to have the highest quality production.

5. In the General Election, our opposition was Earl Patton, a prominent Atlanta Republican. Our general election campaign was along the same lines as the primary with the following changes:

a. We cut the TV expenditure by 1/3. We felt that the exposure from the primary had a carry-over effect. b. We increased our radio spots from 10 to 25 spots in order to get more saturation. These ran for five days preceding the general election. Since there is so much more radio advertising in the general election, radio has to be spread out a little more. c. We ran smaller newspaper ads.

6. No billboards or mailing pieces were produced.

7. The following was our advertising budget for the primary and for the general election. General Primary Election

Television - 10 stations 44,862 30,869 Radio - 106 stations 7,442 11,787 Newspaper - Every paper statewide 7,479 3,750 TV Production 11,291 2,800 Radio Production 550 887 Newspaper Production 1,423 1,083 Miscellaneous 500 400

$73,547.00 $51,576.00 GERALD RAFSHOON ADVERTISING, inc. The First National Bank Building/two peachtree street, n.w. atlanta, georgia 30303/ area code 404 /523-6211

Senator Edmund S. Muskie January 7, 1969 Page 3

We estimate that in a hotly contended statewide race an adequate advertising budget would be in the neigh- borhood of $500,000.

In evaluating the campaign, we must note that Senator Talmadge won 78% of the vote in both the Primary and General Election.

We feel that the advertising campaign contributed to making his victories a landslide. We knew the main thing was to get out the vote. We knew that when most of the voters turned out they would vote for Talmadge but that due to minor opposition there would be a chance of voter apathy. By advertising, we were in a sense saying "We have an election and it is up to you (the voter) to re- affirm your confidence in our candidate."

We were successful.

If we can be of further help or if you have any ques- tions, do not hesitate to call us.

Cordially,

'Gerald M. Rafshoon, /President Gerald Rafshoon Advertising, Inc. GMR:sb cc: Senator Talmadge DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Committee Luncheon

S-120 -- March 5, 1969

12:30 P.M.

AGENDA

1. Resolution to open an account -with the bank.

2. Discussion on staff additions.

3. The Democratic Congressional Dinner -- May 12, 1969

(a) Selection of the Chairman

(b) Determination of basic minimum for incumbents. Determination of transportation account — basic minimum of $1,000 or a minimum of six (6) round trips.

4. Discussion of Fund-raising techniques.

5. Questionaire.

6. Speakers Bureau (Mondale). Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

ROOM 130 SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON 25. D. C.

Telephone CApitol 4-3121 EXT. 2447 TO: Senator Dan Inouye

FROM: Nordy Hoffmann

DATE: February 6, 1969

SUBJECT: Luncheon Meeting to discuss Joint Congressional Dinner,

PRESENT - Ken Harding, Ted Henshaw, Neal Roach, Nordy Hoffmann.

1. Verbally Harding informed me that the House has accepted your recommendation - i.e. 55-45 split after expenses until 322.000 is reached - after that point the split would be 60-40.

2. The date of the Dinner is May 12, 1969 - Washington Hilton.

The price per ticket is $500.00 per person.

This is the Senate year and you are the Host and will, therefore, select the Dinner Chairman.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS for your consideration:

a. That the Dinner be known as The Democratic Leadership Dinner, honoring Senate Majority Leader Mansfield and Speaker of the House McCormack;

b. That Neal Roach be asked to assume the duties of the Executive Director of the Dinner;

c. That Roach be empowered under the Dinner Committee to open office’s in the Mayflower Hotel - Rooms 281-282 - on February 17th and on or about April 7th, to add Room 283 for telephone operations.

d. That the Dinner have no Head Table;

e. That we use the same system in regard to TV as we did last Dinner,

f. That a short outstanding entertainment program be provided;

g. That if possible, the Senate and House each supply 2 qualified women (free if legal) to work on the Dinner Committee. MINUTES OF THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE MEETING - THURSDAY - FEBRUARY 6, 1969 - 10:00 A.M. ROOM S-208 - The CAPITOL

PRESENT were:

Senator Mansfield Senator Inouye Senator Nelson Senator Sparkman Senator Harris Senator Anderson

Nordy Hoffmann Berl Bernhard Stan Kimmitt Barbara Towles

Senator Inouye opened the Meeting and announced that he had been advised that he was to be the Chairman as designated by the Majority Leader.

Senator Nelson would be Vice Chairman.

Senator Mansfield indicated that Senator Muskie would be retained as an ex-officio advisor to the Committee.

The following members were added to the Campaign Committee for the next Congress:

Senator Spong Senator Eagleton Senator Rollings Senator Magnuson Senator Ribicoff

A discussion ensued concerning a Fund Raising Dinner to be held at the Washington Hilton Hotel on either April 21 or May 12. May 12 was approved as the date. -2-

It was pointed out that the House was not satisfied with a 50-50

split from the net proceeds of the Dinner. They were asking for a 2-1 break-

out as their fair share.

Senator Inouye stated that was a bargaining position, of course,

and he was prepared to counter offer as the Committee designated. Previously,

Senator Muskie had devised a formula based on the 25 states where Democratic incumbents were running. A comparison between Senatorial and House of Repre-

sentatives candidates brought about a 59-41% ratio.

Senator Nelson proposed that we suggest to the House that the

Senate will accept a 55-45% ratio until the same amount of money that had been

raised last year was reached. After this initial amount had been secured, we

could then agree to a 59-41% ratio.

Senator Mansfield suggested that the Committee hold firm to their

position because, "the Senate is prepared to handle their own dinner, if it be-

comes necessary."

Mr. Hoffmann pointed out that that’s why two dates were kept open in the event it became necessary to have a Dinner separately from the House.

Considerable discussion continued on the merits of determining a

correct ratio between the Senate and the House.

Senator Mansfield re-affirmed his position that all incumbents would be treated equally as had been done during the past two years.

Senator Sparkman moved that Senator Inouye and Senator Nelson be

empowered to negotiate with the House using the "Nelson formula" as a basis.

Senator Mansfield suggested that these negotiations be conducted

soon and a decision reached on whether or not there would be one or two Dinners. -3-

Senator Inouye then presented the Financial Statement (attached).

Following the approval of the Financial Statement, staff members

left the room and the Senators conducted an off-the-record discussion.

Senator Inouye asked Senator Harris for his ideas as to what the

National. Committee could do to assist the Campaign Committee this year.

Senator Harris replied that he had formed a task force operating under Bill Welch which was currently developing a budget and report which would be available soon.

Senator Inouye stated that he raised the matter since, at the moment, there was no focal point for the Democratic Party and this should be

clarified at an early date.

Senator Inouye stated that he was appointing Senator Nelson as

Chairman of a special committee on utilization of television and other media during the next campaign.

Senator Nelson stated he wanted to work on this matter, wanted to start early and hoped that television programs would be completed by the end of next summer.

Mr. Hoffmann stated that he had planned a Saturday meeting during

March for a conference on all campaign matters including the media. Further information would be available on this later.

Senator Nelson stated that he would like to conduct a meeting with all incumbents at a noon luncheon on a day when the Senate is in session to get ideas.

Senator Inouye directed Mr. Hoffmann to explore what services were available from the National Committee. He further directed Berl Bernhard to come up with financial guidelines for the next campaign. -4-

Mr. Bernhard advised that such instructions should be kept brief and in consonance with the guidelines provided by Senator Stennis at the last luncheon meeting.

Senator Inouye asked approval of $500 per plate for the next Dinner.

No opposition was voiced.

Mr. Hoffmann asked approval of a continuance of the policy of having the books audited, without cost, by the same firm of auditors who have been doing them for the past two years.

Senator Inouye stated he had no objections as long as they were licensed CPAs.

Mr. Hoffmann mentioned that when we file our list of contributors with the House, they are being screened by various people to develop lists of contributors for sale to charitable organizations.

Senator Nelson questioned whether an address need be given.

Mr. Bernhard read the law -which requires that an address be listed for each contributor.

Mr. Hoffmann questioned the Chairman as to the policy of continuing the Tuesday luncheons during the next session. Senator Inouye said he would discuss this matter after the recess.

The meeting adjourned at 11:00 A.M.

UTAH SENATE CAMPAIGN

1969 Activities

Since the election of 1968, several discussion and planning meet- have been held by Senator Moss, both in Utah in Washington, with members of his staff and political advisors. Based on these deliberations, the following list has been prepared. It includes the minimum 1969 requires for an effective Moss campaign.

I. Public Relations Activities

Funds are needed for expansion of the regular information and news-dispensing activities of the Senator's office. Such expansion should include:

A. TV films (3 copies) to be sent weekly to Utah stations

B. Radio tapes to supplement the present spot-news coverage with a regular coverage of Utah radio stations.

C. Mats to be sent twice monthly to weekly newspapers

D. Additional newsletters and mailings which will require paper beyond office allotment

II. Travel

The number of trips alloted by the Senate is insufficient for the year before a campaign. This is the year that the Senator should get a considerable amount of visiting done in the smaller population counties. A considerable increase in travel is required, principally for the Senator, but some for staff and Mrs. Moss. -2-

Polling

A current assessment of voter sentiment on potential candidates and issues is considered essential to the formation of campaign plans. A poll should be taken within the next 90 days. Follow- ups would be considered for the end of this year and the beginning of next.

IV. Public Relations Counsel

The advice of seasoned, nationally experienced public relations counsel would be helpful. It is also believed desirable to name a Utah advertising agency soon so that its advice may be utilized in campaign planning. In addition, consideration is being given to working with a Utah commercial art firm for preparation of an overall campaign design and color scheme.

V. Filming

Effective television commercials are an essential of a successful 1970 campaign. To produce such commercials -- and to produce a documentary film should one be decided on -- a considerable footage of color movie film must be shot this year.

VI. Newspaper Tab

The decision has been made to use a tabloid newspaper special section to be carried by the five Utah daily newspapers on a Sunday near election. This was done in 1964 and was most effective. Following the procedure of the last campaign, the tab will be produced (art work, copy, and layout) this year, and printed early next. -3-

VII. Christmas Card

It is anticipated that a color Christmas post card showing senator and Mrs. Moss and their two grandchildren will be mailed for Christmas 1969 to about half the households in Utah.

VIII. Position Papers

A considerable increase is needed in the number of Moss Senate statements, statements for mailing, and speeches -- both in and out of Washington. For the preparation of these, additional research and writing help is needed. Particularly, someone informed in the economic area would be helpful. Much of what is needed could be done by the Senator's staff, but cannot be handled in addition to the regular work load.

IX, Pre-Campaign Activities

A. Expansion of the Senator’s mailing list is essential. This is now being done by staff assistants.

B. Meetings of the Senator with special groups in Utah should be arranged. Some of this has already been done, and more is in the preparation stage.

C. Activities should begin this year to build the Senator’s relationship with, and enlist the support of, the members of certain groups. The most important of these are:

1. Housewives 2. Young Voters and Youth 3. Organized Labor 4. Rural Voters 5. Federal Employees 6. Educators March 5, 1969 3:00 p.m.

AGENDA; 1970 Utah Campaign Planning

I. Introduction -- opening remarks of DNC Chair- man Fred R. Harris (5 mins.)

II. Report by Senator Ted Moss assessing the overall Utah political situation (10 mins.)

III. Report from Utah (5 mins.)

John Klas, Democratic State Chairman Wayne L. Black, National Committeeman Jean Westwood, National Committeewoman Norma Thomas, State Democratic Vice Chairman Phil Cowley Don Holbrook

IV. Identification of needs during remainder of 1969

United States Senate race Congressional races Building Democratic Party

V. Open discussion by all present concerning plans for meeting needs in 1969 and laying plans for 197 0 March 5, 1969 3:00 p.m.

PARTICIPANT:; 1970 Utah Campaign Planning Meeting

Democratic National Committee:

Chairman Fred R. Harris Vice Chairman Geri Joseph Bill Welsh George Bristol Al Spivak

Senate Campaign Committee:

Sen. Daniel Inouye Nordy Hoffman

House Campaign Committee:

Rep. Ed Edmondson Ken Harding Ted Henshaw

Utah Democratic Party:

Wayne L. Black, National Committeeman Jean Westwood, National Committeewoman John Klas, Democratic State Chairman Norma Thomas, Democratic State Vice Chairman Phil Cowley Don Holbrook

National Labor:

COPE - Al Barkan, Mary Zon, LaMar Gulbransen USW - James O'Brien IAM - Don Ellinger -2-

Utah State Labor;

E. C. Berger, President, State AFL-CIO Michael Durkson, United Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers

NRECA;

Kermit Overby

National Farmers Union;

Blue Carstenson DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE JOB DESCRIPTION

Frank N. Hoffmann, Executive Director

Under the direction of the Chairman and the Committee, the duties are to provide assistance to all Democratic incumbents and nominees in whatever phase of campaign activity they may desire such assistance, i.e., fund-raising, research, organization, liaison with interested groups, and media and press; to act as a clearing house for new techniques of campaigning; to serve as liaison between the Campaign Committee and any such organizations as the

Chairman and the Committee may direct; and to perform any other or related duties pertaining to the campaigns as directed by the Chairmen and the Committee.

I would travel at the request of an incumbent or a nominee with the approval of the Chairman No trips would be initiated by me.

Concerning other income, when I was asked to accept the position of

Executive Director, it was requested that I make a complete break with my former employer. This was to be with the understanding that I could retain my pension, insurance and hospitalization which was already funded. My pension is $7,122.72 before taxes. Campaign Committee Authorization

Would you please complete the enclosed authorization and return it to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Commi- ttee for my information and records.

DANIEL INOUYE Chairman Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

I hereby authorize______of my staff to act for me in my absence on matters affecting the work of the Campaign Committee.

This authorization does (does not) include the hand- ling of money.

DANIEL K. INOUYE Chairman Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee MEMORANDUM

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCING

March 5, 1969 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. SENATORIAL CANDIDATES

A. Expenditures 1-2

B. Reporting Expenditures 2-3

C. Receipts

I. From and by whom contributions may be solicited and accepted.

1. Contributions from individuals 3

2. Contributions from either individuals or organizations. 4

3. Contributions from organizations 4

4. Contributions from fundraising events 4-5

5. Contributions from an individual, organization or a political party 5

6. Solicitation and receipt of funds by Senate employee 5-6

7. Permissible use of contributions 6

II. Where Contributions May Be Solicited or Accepted 6-7

D. Reporting of Receipts 7

II. POLITICAL COMMITTEES

A. Expenditures and Receipts 8

B. Reporting of Expenditures 8

C. Reporting of Receipts 9 DRAFT DRAFT

TO: Nordy Hoffmann

FROM: Berl Bernhard

DATE: March 5, 1969

MEMORANDUM

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCING

I. SENATORIAL CANDIDATES

Note: These provisions do not apply to primary elections because primaries are excluded from the definition of "election” in

Titles 2 and 18, §§ 241 and 591 respectively ”[t]he term ’election’ includes a general or special election, . . . but does not include a primary election or convention of a political party.”

A. Expenditures

Senatorial candidates may not spend, in a campaign for election, more than either:

1. $10,000; or

2. an amount equal to 3¢ multiplied by the total

number of votes cast at the last general election

for all candidates for the office now sought, but

in no event exceeding $25,000.

This limitation does not apply to the following expenses: - 2 -

1. expenses due to state fees;

2. necessary personal, travelling, or subsistence

expenses;

3. money for: stationery, postage, writing, or

printing (other than billboards or newspapers);

distributing letters, circulars, or posters; tele-

phone or telegraph service; proper legal services

in contesting the results of an election . (T. 2,

U.S.C.A. §248)

4. In addition, state laws may further restrict

expenditures by candidates.

This limitation applies only to money spent by the candidate himself. It does not apply to money spent by a committee working for his election; such committee is subject to its own limitations, set forth at the end of this memo. The candidate should keep his personal expenditures completely separate from those a committee makes on his behalf.

B. Reporting Expenditures

A candidate must keep an account of all expenditures made by him or "by any person for him with his knowledge or consent" if the expenditures are in support of his candidacy or are made to influence the result of the election (T. 2 U.S.C.A. §246). Since this is a criminal statute, the phrase "with his knowledge and consent” must be strictly construed to meet the standard of scienter embodied in the criminal law. In other words, a general knowledge that a - 3 - campaign committee is spending money in a candidate's behalf does not impose upon that candidate the obligation to account for each expenditure of that committee. Of course, the committee itself must account for its expenditures if required by Federal or state law.

A candidate's accounts must be filed with the secretary not less than 10 nor more than 15 days before, and within 30 days after, the date on which an election is to be held (T. 2 U.S. C. A. §246).

C. Receipts

I. From and by whom contributions may be solicited

and accepted.

a. From whom contributions may be accepted:

A candidate may accept contributions from individuals,

organizations, his political party, and proceeds from

fundraising events, subject to the following restrictions:

(1) Contributions from individuals:

(a) Neither a Senator nor a Federal employee may solicit

or accept political contributions from Federal employees

and officers.

(b) No one may solicit or accept political contributions from

persons known to be on or entitled to relief (T. 18 U.S.C.A.

§604). This does not include persons receiving loans, pen-

sions, or other benefits from Federal agencies (e.g., Social

Security pensions, unemployment insurance). - 4 -

(2) Contributions from either individuals or organizations:

No one may solicit or accept political contributions from a person, firm, or corporation known to be negotiating for or performing a contract for the Federal Government on his or its own behalf (T. 18 U.S.C.A. §611). Employees of such persons, firms, or corporations may be solicited, and the spouse of a contractor may make a contribution in her own behalf.

(3) Contributions from organizations:

No one may accept political contributions in connection with a Senatorial election from a corporation, labor organization, or national bank (T. 18 U.S.C.A. §610). Personal contributions may be solicited from and made by (a) an officer, employee, or stockholder of a corporation; (b) by an official or employer of a labor union; or (c) by an official or employee of a national bank.

(4) Contributions from fundraising events:

A candidate may accept a contribution from a fundraising event organized and held primarily in his behalf, provided--

(1) He has expressly given his approval of the

fundraising event to the sponsors before any funds

were raised; and

(2) He receives a complete and accurate account-

ing of the source, amounts, and disposition of the

funds raised. (S. Fes. 266: Standing Pules of the Senate, Rule 42). - 5 -

The key word is "accept". This means that a Senator need report and make the appropriate accounting of funds only if he personally accepts monetary contributions by placing them under his control. Thus, a Senator who gives approval for a fundraising event, but does not place any of the funds under his control has no obligation to report and account.

(5) Contributions from an individual, organization or a political party:

A Senator may accept monetary contributions from an individual, organization, or his political party. If from his political party, he need not have given express approval for a fundraising- event. If he personally accepts monetary contributions, he must make an accounting of the source, amount and disposition of the funds received.

A Senator need not report if he does not, in fact, accept and receive these monetary contributions by placing the funds under his control. If the funds are left to be handled at the discretion of a bona fide political committee, independent of the Senator, no reporting is required. (Standing Pules of the Senate, Pule 42)

(6) Solicitation and receipt of funds by Senate employee:

A Senate employee may solicit, receive, or keep campaign funds only if he

1. receives compensation in excess of $10,000;

2. has been designated so to act by the Senator in

writing, and the writing has been filed with the - 6 -

Secretary of the Senate; and

3. is an assistant to a Senator.

(Standing Fules of the Senate, Rule 43).

Note: that Federal employees may neither solicit nor

accept political contributions from other Federal

employees (T. 18 U.S.C.A. § 602).

(7) Permissible use of contributions:

Monetary contributions may be used to defray expenses for travel to a Senator's home state, for printing in connection with speeches and newsletters to constituents, for radio and television directed to constituents or telephone, telegraph, postage, and stationery expenses, in excess of allowance, and for newspaper subscriptions from his home state. (See Standing Fules of the Senate, Rule 42, Paragraph 3).

This defines permissible use and does not require the Senator to report these expenses if they are expended by a bona fide political committee, independent of the Senator.

II. Where Contributions May Be Solicited or Accepted:

Contributions may be solicited and accepted anywhere but in a Federal building (T. 18 U.S.C.A. §603).

The words "in a Federal building" have been interpreted to include buildings occupied only in part by Federal employees, but not to include buildings Federal employees merely visit regularly. (U.S. v. Burleson, D.C. Tenn. 1954, 127 F.

Supp. 400). - 7 -

The Justice Department has interpreted this section to

prohibit the use of a Federal office building address for

the receipt of contributions, and will investigate such a

practice when it is requested to do so.

D. Reporting of Receipts

A candidate must report all contributions received by him, or

"by any person for him with his knowledge or consent" (T. 2 U.S. C. A.

§246). The remarks in Part I. B, page 2, concerning the import of this phrase apply here. "Person" includes individuals, organizations, and committees; "contribution" includes gifts, subscriptions, loans, deposits of money or anything of value (or promises to confer such benefits) (T. 2 U.S.C.A. § 241). This information must be filed with the Secretary of the Senate at the same times as expenditures are to be reported.

A Senator need not report monetary contributions received from fundraising events held primarily on his behalf or by his political party or from individuals or organizations unless he, in fact, accepts the monetary contributions by placing it under his control. (Standing Rules of the Senate, Rule 42, Paragraphs (a)(b)(c).)

II. POLITICAL COMMITTEES

The political committees covered by T. 2 and T. 18 U.S.C.A. are defined in §§ 241 (c) and 591 respectively of those Acts: "the term

'political committee' includes any committee, association, or organization which accepts contributions or makes expenditures for the purpose of - 8 - influencing or attempting to influence the election of candidates or presidential and vice presidential electors (1) in two or more states, or (2) whether or not in more than one state if such committee, association, or organization (other than a duly organized state or local committee of a political party) is a branch or subsidiary of a national committee, association, or organization." The following limitations, then, do not apply to local committees that operate in one state only, if the local committees are neither branches nor subsidiaries of a national entity. Such local committees are, however, subject to state regulation.

A. Expenditures and Receipts

A committee may neither receive nor spend more than

$3,000,000 in any calendar year (T. 18 U.S.C.A. § 609).

B. Reporting of Expenditures

When expenditures to any one person total $ 10 or more in any calendar year, that person's name and address must be reported along with the amount, date, and purpose of the expenditure. They must also report the sum total of all expenditures. These reports are to be filed with the Clerk between the 1st and 10th days of March,

June and September each year, and also between the 10th and 15th days, and on the 5th day, next preceding the date on which a general election is to be held, and also on the 1st day of January (T. 2 U.S.C.A. §244). - 9 -

C. Reporting of Receipts

Campaign committees must report the name and address of each person contributing an aggregate of $100 or more in any one calendar year, together with the amount and date of the contribution. They must also report the sum total of all other expenditures. These are to be reported at the same place and times as expenditures (See above, p. 2.) DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Committee Luncheon

S-120 — March 5, 1969

12:30 P.M.

AGENDA

1. Resolution to open an account with the bank.

2. Discussion on staff additions.

3. The Democratic Congressional Dinner — May 12, 1969.

(a) Selection of the Chairman

(b) Determination of basic minimum for incumbents. Determination of transportation account — basic minimum of $1,000 or a minimum of six (6) round trips.

4. Discussion of Fund-raising techniques.

5. Questionaire.

6. Speakers Bureau (Mondale). DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE ROOM 130 SENATE OFFICE BUILDING SENATORS: WASHINGTON. D. C. 20510 EILER RAVNHOLT SECRETARY-TREASURER DANIEL K. INOUYE, HAWAII, CHM. TELEPHONE (202) 225-2447 BERL BERNHARD GAYLORD NELSON. WIS., V. CHM. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, N.M. GENERAL COUNSEL THOMAS F. EAGLETON, MO. FRANK N. HOFFMANN FRED R. HARRIS, OKLAHOMA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, S.C. THOMAS J. MCINTYRE, N.H. WARREN G. MAGNUSON. WASH. WALTER F. MONDALE, MINN. ABRAHAM RIBICOFF, CONN. JOHN SPARKMAN, ALA. WILLIAM B, SPONG, JR., VA. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, MAINE, EX OFFICIO

MEMORANDUM

TO: Democratic Senators FROM: Nordy Hoffmann

RE: Campaign Financing DATE: May 1, 1969

Attached is a memorandum on legal requirements for campaign

financing. It is being distributed now in view of the May 15 date for re-

porting under the Senate Ethics Resolution (S. Res. 266).

It was prepared for your personal guidance, not for public dis-

tribution, and should be handled accordingly

*Access to articles restricted to University of Hawai'i affiliates only.

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. (1969). Confidential Memorandum: Legal Requirements for Campaign Financing (no edition). Washington, D.C, U.S.A.: Hoffman, Nordy.